Complete Arcane, huh

[Romnipotent]

Just reading over the Fatespinner to find that the pre reqs are Knowledge Arcana 10 ranks, and an example has a Wiz5/Fatespinner 3... is this regular? I mean I've been demeaning WotC's quality control for months now, but really, is it that diificult to write a 5 level prestige class, and make such errors?

Well, guess thats not my choice.

 

[Thanee]

Well...

I'm actually more irritated by Innate Spell.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Jarrod]

I have been seeing more and more incorrect sample characters. They tend to get picked up in errata (expect Wiz 7/FS 3), but...

My gripes with CA are two. First, "Discern Shapechanger" has a line about "Discovering people in disguise". Nice way to shaft the rogue, guys... a 50th level epic rogue in disguise would be spotted by a 3rd level spell.

That, and the proliferation of evocation-like conjuration spells. Orb of Force? Force as a "conjuration" effect? Whazzat?

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm actually more irritated by Innate Spell.

Oh, no... what did they do? :\

 

[Testament]

Meh, its not like that's the first time they've made such a glaring error in the Complete Books.

Wait a minute, you mean someone actually bothers to read those wastes of ink that are the sample NPCs?! Wow.

 

[Sammael]

I just looked at the Innate Spell and, at a glance, it looks exactly the same as it did in FRCS. What'd I miss?